Lesley M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel, and William C. Campbell,
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of Columbia, for Office of Disciplinary
Counsel.

Coming B. Gibbs, Jr., of Gibbs and Holmes, of Charleston, for
respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and the Office
of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by
Consent pursuant to Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In the agreement,
respondent admits misconduct and consents to disbarment pursuant to Rule 7(b),
RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In addition, respondent agrees to pay full restitution
to clients, banks, and other persons and entities, including the Lawyers' Fund
for Client Protection, who have incurred losses as a result of her misconduct
and to reimburse the Commission on Lawyer Conduct (the Commission) and ODC for
costs incurred in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. We accept
the agreement and disbar respondent from the practice of law in this state. Further,
respondent shall pay full restitution to all clients, banks, and other persons
and entities, including the Lawyers' Fund, who have incurred losses as a result
of her misconduct and reimburse the Commission and ODC for costs incurred in
this matter. The facts, as set forth in the agreement, are as follows.

FACTS

Matter I

Respondent
received checks and money orders from clients for payments to the clients'
mortgage lender. Respondent accepted the checks and money orders payable to
the lender and deposited some of the checks and money orders into her trust
accounts and operating account.

Respondent
admits she failed to make the mortgage payments for the clients, used the
checks and money orders entrusted to her for purposes other than payment of the
clients' mortgage, made material misrepresentations to the court at the
foreclosure hearing regarding her clients' home, and that her failure to make
her clients' mortgage payments resulted in the clients' home being sold at
foreclosure.

Respondent
acknowledges she failed to communicate with her clients regarding the
foreclosure action. Respondent's clients only learned that their home was sold
at the foreclosure sale when approached by the lender's real estate agent. Due
to respondent's misconduct, her clients had to obtain new counsel in an effort
to save their home.[1]

Respondent
admits she failed to safeguard her clients' funds. Further, she admits she wrote
checks from her trust accounts for expenses such as employee payroll, her
children's school programs, parking tickets, and restaurant charges.

Respondent
acknowledges her trust accounts have carried a negative balance and that she
had trust account checks returned for insufficient funds. She admits she did
not reconcile her trust accounts, did not keep individual client ledgers, and
did not retain the bank statements for her trust accounts, all of which are required
by Rule 417, SCACR. In addition, she admits her records are in such disarray
that the trust accounts cannot be reconciled. Respondent agrees she failed to
cooperate with ODC as she failed to respond to the Notice of Full Investigation
in this matter.[2]

Matter II

Respondent
admits she failed to communicate with her client in this matter regarding a
probate case. Respondent settled the probate matter and funds in the amount of
$6,538.90 were to be refunded to the client. Respondent admits she failed to
remit the funds to her client.

Respondent
admits that her client filed an action against her in summary court and was
awarded a judgment. The client filed a claim with the Lawyer's Fund and was
awarded $5,788.90.

Respondent
acknowledges the client's funds are not in her trust accounts. Respondent
admits she failed to cooperate with ODC in that she did not respond to the
Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter III

Clients
retained respondent to represent them in a civil matter. Respondent admits she
failed to diligently and competently represent the clients, failed to
communicate adequately, failed to return telephone calls in a timely manner,
failed to advise the clients regarding court appearances, and failed to give
them timely notice of hearings. In addition, respondent did not make timely
court appearances on behalf of clients and failed to produce discovery requests
to opposing counsel. Respondent admits her misconduct in the civil action
caused delays in the prosecution of the case. Respondent further admits that
she did not cooperate with ODC as she failed to respond to the Supplemental
Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter IV

Respondent
admits that, as of July 2009, she had three fraudulent check charges which had
been pending in Summary Court since June 2003. Respondent agrees she failed to
timely resolve these charges, but asserts the charges have now been dismissed
and expunged.

Matter V

Respondent was appointed by the Charleston County Probate Court
as Special Administrator to handle the Estate of Doe. Respondent admits she
informed Doe's family that the estate would disburse funds to the family in
October 2008 and that she informed the family in writing as to the amount of
the disbursement. Respondent admits none of the family has received any
disbursements from the estate and that she does not have the funds to disburse
to the family. Further, respondent concedes she does not have records that
would account for the funds of the estate. Respondent admits she failed to
cooperate with ODC in that she did not respond to the Supplemental Notice of
Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter VI

Respondent
admits she drafted a will for Client A naming herself as Personal
Representative and Trustee of his trust. Respondent admits she did not have
Client A seek the advice of other counsel prior to naming herself Personal
Representative and Trustee. Further, respondent admits she had her family
members witness both the will and trust and a member of her family served as the
notary for the execution of the will and trust.

Respondent
agrees that, as Trustee, she was to make payments to maintain Client A's
residence and for the benefit of his spouse. She admits she did not make the
payments to maintain the residence or support the spouse.

Respondent
admits she has taken funds belonging to the trust and converted those funds to
her use. Respondent acknowledges the Probate Court ordered that she be
replaced as Personal Representative and Trustee. Respondent agrees she
failed to make an accounting to the new Personal Representative and to the
Probate Court and has been held in contempt by the Probate Court for her
failure to cooperate with the court. Respondent further admits she failed to
cooperate with ODC as she did not respond to the Supplemental Notice of Full
Investigation in this matter.

Matter VII

Respondent
admits she failed to pay a court reporter for a deposition transcript that was
originally invoiced on October 20, 2008, in the amount of $359.25. She failed
to pay the same court reporter for a deposition transcript that was originally
invoiced on June 4, 2009, in the amount of $265.50. Respondent failed to
cooperate with ODC in that she failed to respond to the Supplemental Notice of
Full Investigation in this matter.

LAW

Respondent admits that, by
her misconduct, she has violated the following provisions of the Rules of
Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR: Rule 1.1 (lawyer shall provide
competent representation to a client); Rule 1.3 (lawyer
shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness
in representing a client); Rule 1.4 (lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about
the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for
information); Rule 1.15 (lawyer shall hold property of clients
in the lawyer’s possession in connection with a representation separate from
the lawyer’s own property); Rule 3.2 (lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to
expedite litigation consistent with the interests of client); Rule 3.3 (lawyer
shall not knowingly make false statement of fact to tribunal); Rule 4.1 (in
representing client, lawyer shall not knowingly make false statement of fact to
third person); Rule 4.4 (in representing client, lawyer shall not use means
that have no substantial purpose other than to burden third party); Rule 8.1
(lawyer shall not knowingly fail to respond to lawful demand for information
from disciplinary counsel); Rule 8.4(a) (it is professional misconduct for a
lawyer to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct); Rule 8.4(d) (it is
professional misconduct for lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation); and Rule 8.4(e) (it is professional
misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the
administration of justice). In addition, respondent admits she violated the
financial recordkeeping provisions of Rule 417, SCACR.

Further,
respondent admits her misconduct is grounds for discipline under Rule 7, RLDE,
of Rule 413, SCACR, specifically Rule 7(a)(1) (it shall be ground for
discipline for lawyer to violate Rules of Professional Conduct) and 7(a)(5) (it
shall be ground for discipline for lawyer to engage in conduct tending to
pollute the administration of justice or to bring the courts or the legal
profession into disrepute or conduct demonstrating an unfitness to practice
law).

CONCLUSION

We
accept the Agreement for Discipline by Consent and disbar respondent. Further,
we order respondent to pay full
restitution to all clients, banks, and other persons and entities, including
the Lawyers’ Fund, who have incurred losses as a result of her misconduct and
to reimburse the Commission and ODC for costs incurred in this matter. Within
thirty (30) days of the date of this opinion, the Commission and respondent
shall enter into a restitution agreement which complies with the directives of
this opinion. Under no circumstances
shall respondent be permitted to file a Petition for Reinstatement until full
restitution and payment of costs have been made.

Within
fifteen (15) days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an
affidavit with the Clerk of Court showing that she has complied with Rule 30 of
Rule 413, SCACR, and shall also surrender her Certificate of Admission to the
Practice of Law to the Clerk of Court.

DISBARRED.

TOAL,
C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.

[1] Fortunately, clients' new counsel was able to
persuade the court to set aside the foreclosure sale.

[2] By order dated July 8, 2009, the Court placed
respondent on interim suspension. In the Matter of Crummey, 383 S.C.
359, 680 S.E.2d 276 (2009).